4 ms·
But it's a cost shared by all open shells, right? Well, even if it was 15MB per shell session, it should still be worth it if the startup and searching is faste
by klibertp 3y ago
But it's a cost shared by all open shells, right? Well, even if it was 15MB per shell session, it should still be worth it if the startup and searching is faster.
For comparison: I use extended ZSH history format, which records a timestamp and duration of the call (and nothing else), and I have ~65k entries there, with history file size, as mentioned, 3.8MB. It could be an order of magnitude larger and I still wouldn't care, as long as it loads faster than it takes ZSH to parse its history file.
- conradludgate 3y agoYes, this is 15MB on disk size for your whole machine. We agree that the trade off is worth it for the utility and speed improvements